"Science Fiction World" Storm
2010-04-2013: 26: 21Source: China entrepreneurs (Beijing) posted 0 mobile phones to see stocks.
On March 2 1 day, an open letter entitled "Science Fiction World to National Fantasy Fans" made this storm even more fierce! Open letters spread rapidly in major online communities such as Douban and Tianya. With the tone of "all the staff in the science fiction world", the writer lists seven "evil deeds" of Li Chang, the current president and editor-in-chief of Science Fiction World magazine. For example, in editing, Chang Li was accused of "using chinese editorials to write novels instead of writers, using translators to translate novels instead of foreign editors, and using Art editor to draw illustrations instead of painters, completely unaware of the social division of labor between authors and editors, and trying to turn the science fiction world into a small workshop in the agricultural era".
This event was vividly called "science fiction world" by the media. Li Chang, the central figure of the event, was a member of China Meteorological Society, a reporter of Meteorological News and an assistant to the county magistrate before he presided over Science Fiction World magazine. In September 2000, he served as president and editor-in-chief of Sichuan Science and Technology News. In June 2008, after Qin Li, he was transferred to the post of president and editor-in-chief of Science Fiction World magazine. Li Chang behind The Seven Deaths is portrayed as a typical image of contemporary bureaucrats. Some commentators said that the "science fiction world" incident can highlight another tragedy of "laymen leading experts". Perhaps more than that, the incident also involved a struggle between culture and business, and even a struggle between a group of editors guarding their ideals and secular power. Reminiscent of the Sanlian Bookstore incident in 2004, there are many similarities between these two incidents, both of which involve the interests of the publishing industry, all because of the ignorance and arbitrariness of a leader, and even the public sale of ISBN is strikingly similar. But apart from these similarities, perhaps we should pay more attention to the differences between them. The brand and history of Sanlian Bookstore are obvious to all. There are tens of millions of readers behind it, and its troubles involve all walks of life. This huge influence directly led to the rapid resolution of the triple storm.
However, in the "science fiction world" incident, it is impossible to have as great influence as Sanlian Bookstore, which determines that its future road is bumpy. At least up to now, what we can observe is not very clear. Behind Li Chang is a powerful interest chain and bureaucratic network. Their hidden existence can even ignore the existence and interests of readers and editors, which directly determines the future fate of the science fiction world. We can imagine that in the eyes of such amateur bureaucrats, Science Fiction World is just a small magazine, which can be forcibly interrupted by administrative means under various high-sounding excuses such as weak influence, declining sales and no market income.
We often say, prepare for the worst and reap the best results. The above analysis is the worst plan. There is also speculation that Chang Li will remain in office, and all editors can resign collectively as stated in the open letter. This situation may also happen, which is also a realistic guess: First of all, Chang Li's appointment as the president and editor-in-chief of Science Fiction World magazine is appointed by his superiors and has nothing to do with democracy. Therefore, the collective "forcing the palace" of editors can be regarded as an act of provocation to superiors, and can even be characterized as "a handful of editors who don't know the truth are dissatisfied with their leaders and gather people to make trouble." Especially up to now, many editors have been disheartened and resigned voluntarily, which virtually provided more excuses for Chang Li's return and return to power. Because "a handful" left, the dissatisfied ones were silent, and the science fiction world still returned to the original management mode dominated by Li Chang.
Of course, the best plan we hope to see is that the higher authorities can listen to and obey the "public opinion" and re-appoint an expert leader to lead the magazine, but this hope is slim. On the one hand, "going against public opinion" in the name of listening to public opinion has become the style of many bureaucrats. It seems that only "going its own way" can show the true dignity of officials, rather than serving the people. On the other hand, if we don't abolish this administrative appointment system, we can't get an "expert leader". In the professional era, leadership is also a profession. Different from other majors, our leaders use their own majors to dominate all other industries, which is a major feature of our enterprises in China, but also a major drawback. Besides, maybe we will have a question. For example, the writer Alai is not a professional in science fiction. Why can he lead such a magazine to flourish?
This reminds me of a book I recently read, gaston Galima: A Half-century History of French Publishing. In the history of French publishing in the 20th century, Garima Publishing House, founded by gaston Garima, occupied half of the country, which was famous in history and basically included famous French writers. But who would have thought that the most famous publisher was just an ordinary businessman at first and knew nothing about the publishing industry? According to Gide, the founder and great writer of the original publishing house, Galima was called to preside over the publishing house because he was rich and could contribute to the magazine's finance. Selfless enough to ignore short-term interests; Be careful enough to do things; Love literature enough to achieve quality first and return second; Have enough ability to establish their own prestige; Be obedient enough to carry out the instructions of the founder Gide. Of course, more importantly, although Galima was still a young man in his twenties and had no cultural expertise, he had a sense of smell and could correctly judge the quality of his works and go straight to the best things, not because of rational reasons, but because he liked them. In this way, Galima became a publisher.
Taking this example, I just want to explain what qualities a suitable leader should have in order to lead a magazine correctly. Writer Roy can lead the world of science fiction not only because he is also a writer, but because he respects writers, his editorial team and literature. He is cautious enough. He has a rare leadership quality, and laymen can really respect experts. Recalling the Sanlian Bookstore incident in 2004, the reporter interviewed Mr. Fan Yong, who had served as a leader in Sanlian. He said that Sanlian's leadership is actually very good, nothing else. Good books can be published as long as they have a good relationship with writers, authors and editors. In this storm of science fiction, judging from Chang Li's "seven deadly sins", he put personal interests above the collective, destroyed the relationship chain among writers, authors and editors, and caused many editors and authors to complain. It was only a matter of time before he made a mistake and was forced into the palace collectively.
Indeed, in every corner of the world today, there are some people with high salaries who can't do their jobs well. This is also the content of the famous "Peter's Principle" in management: If Chang Li is an excellent meteorologist-19921,he was named as the first top ten young people in Sichuan meteorological system-we only assume that he was promoted to the president and editor-in-chief of Science Fiction World magazine because of this excellent professional accomplishment, not other political factors. But after that, the following may happen (in fact, it is already a fait accompli). This excellent meteorologist is very incompetent in managing sci-fi world magazines. Therefore, the "Peter Principle" holds that the law of enterprise management is that everyone is doing what he can't do. Of course, the "Peter principle" is only an international practice. In China, we need a variant with China characteristics, namely "China's version of Peter's Principle", which can be summarized as follows: If you want to commend someone or crowd him out, you might as well let him move to another place and arrange for him to do a job that he is incompetent for (but get a better salary).
According to this "hidden rule", we might as well make a bold guess about Comrade Chang Li's future: when he makes a mess of the "science fiction world", he is likely to change his face in the near future and become the manager of a higher department, euphemistically called transfer. On the one hand, it can appease the editors and authors of Science Fiction World magazine, on the other hand, it can make economic and welfare compensation for Comrade Chang Li's injured mind. Why not kill two birds with one stone?
Finally, I want to analyze and think about the role of the network in this incident. In fact, not only the "science fiction world" storm, but also many major events spread through the Internet first, and then gradually attracted the attention of the mass media and higher authorities and intervened in the investigation. Some people say that the Internet has become the best field to show democracy and public opinion. However, we should be very wary of this kind of democracy and public opinion becoming a noisy topic for a while, and we should implement this kind of democracy and public opinion in real life. The "Science Fiction World" activity was first published on Douban on March 2 1, and was recommended by more than 4,000 netizens in just two days, and then reprinted by major media.
This is a very interesting sign. Whenever an event touches the sensitive nerves of the public, the whole network group will seize the whole opportunity to express their opinions, as if to regain the feeling of unity and fighting side by side that cannot be realized in reality in a simple recommendation and attention, as if the recommenders of each event have become the protagonists of social life and are all fighting together for a common moral ideal.
In my opinion, this network recommendation and signature movement shows the advantages of the network. It shows that in today's unprecedented poisoning of political life, most people feel an urgent need to unite with others. In this sense, online signatures and recommendations also show that in this already distracted society, the public feels a need to collectively express public will. For such a signal, I hope that those bureaucrats who shut up and restrict online public opinion will really reflect on whether the illusory network has practical significance and role.